The Week That Was – Why There Is No Joy In NXIVMville

This past week was filled with several major developments regarding the case of the U.S. v. Raniere – and set the stage for the ultimate demise of Keith Raniere and his remaining co-defendants in that case.

As we look forward to Monday’s Status Conference – and another update on Keith’s status at the Metropolitan Detention Center, which we hope to have in the next few days – let’s take a moment to look back at what happened this week and what it portends for the future.

Barbara Bouchey

RE: Barbara Bouchey

The week started out with news that Barbara Bouchey would be writing a series of stories about NXIVM/ESP – and sharing her inside knowledge about what went on during the 9-years that she was part of the cult and what’s happened during the 10 years since she left and became one of Keith Raniere’s favorite human punching bags.

In the first of her stories, Barbara explained why she stayed with Raniere after she found out he was sleeping with other women. According to Barbara, that occurred about a year after she first met Raniere – and was already in an intimate relationship with him.

Given that she was one of the highest ranking members of NXIVM/ESP at the time that she quit – and given her intimate relationship with Raniere – many Frank Report readers were expecting her to provide detailed information about the cult’s nefarious activities. But according to Barbara, Raniere and the other members of this inner circle kept her totally “walled off” from any information about those type of activities.

In addition to posting her own stories, Barbara has also been diligently responding to questions from various Frank Report readers. Thus far, readers have mostly responded positively to her willingness to answer their questions – and seem to be looking forward to having her continue to do so.

RE: Nancy Salzman
On Wednesday, Nancy Salzman appeared before U.S. District Court Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis – and pleaded guilty to one count of Racketeering Conspiracy – and two related criminal acts: i.e., conspiracy to commit identity theft and conspiracy to alter records used in an official proceeding.

The announcement – which her attorneys did not share in advance with the attorneys representing Raniere, Clare Bronfman, Allison Mack, Kathy Russell, and Nancy’s daughter, Lauren – sent shock waves through the NXIVM/ESP community.

Not only did Nancy plead guilty to all the criminal acts with which she had been charged, she also did so without any sort of “plea deal” in place.

As a result, Nancy’s fate is entirely in the hands of Judge Garaufis – who reminded her on several occasions before he accepted her guilty plea that he would have absolute discretion in setting her sentence.

So, although the Federal Sentencing Guidelines call for a prison term of 33-41 months for Nancy, the reality is she could end up serving anywhere from 0 months to 240 months (Neither of those extreme is expected to be her sentence).

Most courtroom observers have assumed that Nancy will become a key witness for the prosecution. But one attorney who is intimately familiar with all the details of the case has opined that the prosecution will probably not even call her as a witness.

It’s also possible that Nancy – as well as her former co-defendants and many other people who were associated with NXIVM/ESP – could be facing a bevy of state-level charges. Although no New York State official – including the Governor, Andrew Cuomo – has ever shown any inclination to bring any charges against anyone associated with the cult, it should be noted that the new Attorney General, Letitia James, could make quite a name for herself by bringing criminal charges against high-ranking members of the cult and the slew of public officials that allowed the cult to operate with impunity for almost 20-years.

While none of her co-defendants were in the courtroom when Nancy pleaded guilty, it seems reasonable to assume that they have now all heard about the event.

And they probably have also heard about this exchange between Judge Garaufis and Nancy’s lead attorney, David Stern:

THE COURT: Are you aware of any viable legal defense to the charge (of Racketeering Conspiracy against your client)?

MR. STERN: I think we’ve thought this case through and discussed it amongst ourselves and I think on balance we’ve decided there is not a viable legal defense.

Just stop and think about that…

Nancy’s attorneys could not figure out any way to defend her against the charge of Racketeering Conspiracy – and the underlying predicate acts.

Now, think how you would feel if you were Keith Raniere, Allison Mack, Clare Bronfman, Kathy Russell or Lauren Salzman – all of whom are facing that same charge as well as many other charges.

“…we’ve decided there is not a viable legal defense”.

Wow!

*****

RE: Second Superseding Indictment
The very next day, the other shoe dropped for all of Nancy’s former co-defendants when the lead prosecutor, Moira Kim Penza, unveiled the second superseding indictment in the case.

As Nancy headed off to spend a couple of days with her elderly parents to explain to them why she is now a felon and likely headed to prison, Raniere and several of the others found out that they are now facing new charges.

Keith Alan Raniere got new charges this week.

For Raniere, the second superseding indictment brought a wave of very bad news. That’s because he’s now facing four new charges in addition to all the old ones:
– One count of Racketeering – and several new predicate acts;
– Two counts of Sexual Exploitation of a Child; and
– One count of Possession of Child Pornography.

For Mack, the second superseding indictment added one new count of Racketeering – but dropped her name from several predicate acts.

For Bronfman, the second superseding indictment added one new count of Racketeering – bur dropped one predicate act.

For Lauren, the second superseding indictment added one new count of Racketeering – and added one new predicate act.

For Russell, the second superseding indictment left her with just one count of Racketeering Conspiracy – and dropped her from any mention in all of the predicate acts.

*****

So, all in all, not a very good week for Keith Raniere AKA Federal Prisoner 57005-177.

We did, however, find out that in addition to being revered as “The Vanguard”, Raniere also likes to be called “Grandmaster” and “Master”.

I’m sure the other prisoners at the Metropolitan Detention Center will be impressed as hell by that news.

50 Comments

It’s entirely possible that Nancy and the documents contained in Clare’s Clifton Park storage unit can point the Feds in the direction of new crimes committed by NXIVM and its top members resulting in a new grand jury and new indictment.

Yes, I hope the hell they investigate the local and state officials whose pockets were lined with corrupt NXIVM loot. Unless that happens, there will be only limited justice while the real criminals continue to pillage society.

This is the passion of Vanguard. It will soon be over. Nxivm is not dead. We are still united. Only Nancy has taken the fall. Vanguard will lead us in person and we will have vanguard week this year. He has promised us this. #believeourVanguard.

Klaviger – you missed a count. One count of visa fraud against Raniere and Bronfman, presumably regarding Marianna Fernandez. Fernandez is not named as a defendant but in the least she’ll never be allowed in the U.S. again.

@Pea Onyu : Your “Keith” is already rotting in Hell and his suffering will be beyond your crooked imagination.

He will suffer and suffer and suffer again until his soul simply dissolves in Hell.

You can feel it but you don’t accept it. You came here to spread your lies and your vain attempt to lie to yourself, but you know it: There is no one and nothing that can help him from escaping his fate. This is called karma.

So abandon all fate to see him free. Free he will never be. Keep away from that hellish path, so-called “Pea”, you can still save your own soul…

And he’s not a martyr. He’s just a diabolical being. Too many people have suffered because of his machinations.

A question for those with better US law knowledge. In racketeering / RICO cases does everyone bar those who have taken plea deals get the same jail tiime if found guilty? How long could this end up being now the new additional charges have been brought?

There are lots of factors that will affect the sentences that are meted out in this case. Here are a few of them:
– Those who plead guilty will usually get a downward departure for admitting their guilt – which will automatically reduce their recommended sentence under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines (Nancy got a 3-level downward departure).
– Those who go to trail will often get the maximum sentence for any crimes for which they are convicted.
– The maximum sentence for Racketeering Conspiracy is 20-years (All five defendants are facing this charge).
– The maximum sentence for Racketeering is 20-years (Everyone except Kathy Russell is facing this charge).
– The maximum sentence for Sex Trafficking is life imprisonment (Keith and Allison are facing this charge).
– The maximum sentence for Sex Trafficking Conspiracy is life imprisonment (Keith and Allison are facing this charge).
– The maximum sentence for all the other charges is 20 years or less.
– Whatever sentences are meted out will likely run concurrently.

There are lots of other personal factors that will be part of the Presentencing Report that is put together for each defendant who is convicted. But there’s really no way of knowing what all of those are right now.

So basically everyone who doesn’t plea (apart from Kathy who apparently did serve as a servant/prisoner to Nancy maybe just as long anyhow) is going to prison for at least 20 years?! Wowzers and that is gonna suck

Question to Pea and fellow NXIVM’s including friends and family, where do you see CB, LS, AM, KR and KAR in the future?

To begin, the Sentencing Guidelines are now advisory, not mandatory. However, any sentence within the Guidelines carries a presumption of reasonableness. In addition, with mandatory minimums, it does not matter what the PSI/PSR (Pre-sentence Investigation or Report) recommends. If the crime has a mandatory minimum of 10 years, the Defendant will serve those 10 years. The mandatory minimums are set by Congress, not the Courts.

If a first-time offender is found guilty, it does not mean the person will get the maximum sentence. It only means that at sentencing, the Judge has discretion to sentence within the Guideline range. Now, the Judge can downward depart (reduce the sentence) or upward depart (increase the sentence), based on the severity of the crime, sentencing factors, violence, etc.

However, the PSR will already calculate the recommended range based on the person’s Criminal History Category (column) and the base offense level (row). The base offense levels are found in the US Code for each Federal crime.

As bad as Lauren, Kathy, Allison are – they will NOT get the maximum sentence, because they are first-time offenders. And then that upward departure of max sentence would also not have the presumption of reasonableness. In that instance, the sentence can be appealed on the basis of sentencing error.

The exception to the mandatory minimum is use of the ‘safety valve’ or ‘substantial cooperation’. Thus, the Sentencing Guidelines have a built-in incentive to make the Defendants plead and testify.

Lastly, the Judge has the discretion to stack the sentences and have then run consecutively. However, this is extremely rare. Typically, if a Defendant is convicted on multiple counts, the Defendant’s time at BOP will be calculated on the count with the longest sentence.

I never said that the “Federal Sentencing Guidelines” are mandatory (As the name suggests – and as you correctly noted I never said that the “Federal Sentencing Guidelines” are mandatory (As the name suggests – and as you correctly noted – they are merely advisory). What I did say is that “Those who plead guilty will usually get a downward departure for admitting their guilt – which will automatically reduce their recommended sentence under the “Federal Sentencing Guidelines”. That is an accurate statement – and it’s exactly what happened in Nancy’s case

And while you’re also correct that some federal crimes carry mandatory minimum sentences, I don’t believe that any of the crimes that have been charged in this case have that attribute (I have not looked at each of the eleven counts regarding that issue but I will certainly do so – and post whatever I find out). FAMM has a pretty decent summary about mandatory minimum sentences at: https://famm.org/our-work/sentencing-reform/sentencing-101/

And while you may not believe it’s true, I can assure you that federal defendants who go to trial and are convicted often end up with the harshest possible sentences (Even if they’re not maximum sentences, they definitely trend in that direction). If that weren’t the case, then no one would ever take a plea deal.

Finally, I agree with you that it is very unlikely that Judge Garaufis will stack the sentences for any defendants who choose to go to trial – and are convicted of multiple crimes. Part 2 of the recent Manafort sentencing was definitely the exception, not the rule.

Didn’t Manafort go to trial and get convicted but only got sentenced to less than 4 years when the Fed. guidelines gave a range of 19 to 24 years. Considering Keith is a white male, perhaps he’ll have a judge who will also think he has lead an otherwise blameless life.

What is happening with Frank’s trial? Since he’s not pleading guilty will he get the max of 15 years or whatever if he’s found guilty or get the white-collar, white male tap on the wrist sentence. Since Frank’s been arrested and named in more than a few non-NXIVM lawsuits though, maybe the judge won’t find he’s led a blameless life or will his helping to expose NXIVM get him brownie points?

Letitia James is just as crooked as anybody else who could ever come under Cuomo. She’ll be more concerned about seeing what garbage she can try to pin on anyone even close to the Trump family just because they are still pissed Hillzilla lost.

“But one attorney who is intimately familiar with all the details of the case has opined that the prosecution will probably not even call her as a witness.”

I thought I had read something similar in an article elsewhere regarding Nancy not testifying, they wrote it like it was fact. Could someone clarify as to why they wouldn’t? Would this be because of all the other strong evidence or to reduce the risk of her being slaughtered on the stand by the defense?

Just wanted to say that it’s possible Keith’s fellow inmates might try to give him a Cleveland Steamer.

It’s gross.

If you don’t know what a Cleveland Steamer is, try asking NiceGuy. That pervert is very well versed in such topics. He and his wife are ultra-kinky in that regard. They are probably no strangers to doing the Dirty Sanchez either.

Your so right about our sexual proclivities. We get so dirty all the time. Can we purchase some of the few thousand bars of Amway soap,presently stored in your parent’s garage, from you ? Do you offer discounts for the old soap?

Scott by the way your “radio show”, is actually called a podcast nowadays…..

Scott why did you stay with Amway during the course two separate decades?

Scott do you fill guilty about bringing in new Amway members/employees? Or were you unable to recruit anyone besides mom, dad, and a elderly woman named Grandma?

Do you ever make sculptures or carvings out of soap or do other various arts and crafts projects using the soap?

I seldom used soap bars, just the liquid soap. I never had more than a couple of those on hand at any time and it is long gone, although I may have a little bit left over from the Pokorny v. Amway class action lawsuit. Therefore, you’re out of luck. No soap, no discounts. Plus, my mom died over a decade ago and my dad is in an assisted care facility, so they no longer have a garage. The guy who runs the show calls it a radio show, I’ll ask him about changing it to a podcast. I stayed in Amway because I, and millions of others, believed their lies. Amway has very good liars, Raniere learned well from them. I don’t fill [sic] guilty about getting people involved in what I thought was a legitimate business. Why should I? Mom, dad, and grandma (who died before I joined Amway in 1993) never signed up, we signed up several others, however. None of them relatives. I never carved any soap. Any other stupid questions? LOL